Suppr超能文献

两种即时检测SARS-CoV-2抗体的快速检测方法与基于实验室的SARS-CoV-2 IgG、IgM和总抗体自动化化学发光免疫分析方法的性能比较。

Performance of two rapid point of care SARS-COV-2 antibody assays against laboratory-based automated chemiluminescent immunoassays for SARS-COV-2 IG-G, IG-M and total antibodies.

作者信息

Lau C S, Hoo S P, Liang Y L, Phua S K, Aw T C

机构信息

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Changi General Hospital, Singapore.

Department of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.

出版信息

Pract Lab Med. 2021 Mar;24:e00201. doi: 10.1016/j.plabm.2021.e00201. Epub 2021 Jan 19.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

We evaluated two SARS-CoV-2 antibody point-of-care tests (POCTs) (Abbott Panbio COVID-19 IgG/IgM and Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody tests) and compared the results to their respective chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs) (Abbott Architect IgM, Architect IgG, Roche Cobas total antibody assays).

METHOD

200 pre-pandemic sera and 48 samples positive for various conditions (18 viral hepatitis, 18 dengue, 11 ANA and 1 dsDNA) were used as controls and to assess for cross-reactivity. Anonymised residual leftover sera positive for SARS-CoV-2 on RT-PCR were recruited as cases (n ​= ​133). The sensitivity/specificity/cross-reactivity/positive predictive value (PPV)/negative predictive value (NPV) of the POCTs were assessed. Concordance between the POCTs and chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs) were analysed.

RESULTS

Abbott/Roche POCT specificity was 98.7%/100% (95% CI 96.5-99.8/98.5-100) and sensitivity was 97.2%/97.2% (95% CI 85.5-99.9/85.5-99.9) in cases ≥14 days post-first positive RT-PCR (POS), PPV was 68.7%/100% (95% CI 41.3-87.2/94.7-100.0), and NPV was 97.4%/97.6% (95% CI 97.0-97.8/97.2-98.0). In cases ≥14 days POS, concordance of Abbott/Roche POCT and CLIAs was 97.2%/100% (35/36 and 36/36 results). The sensitivity of individual IgM-band results on both POCTs did not increase >95% even after 14 days POS (Abbott 2.78%, Roche 44.4%).

CONCLUSION

Both POCTs have good specificity, little cross-reactivity with other antibodies, and sensitivity >95% when used in subjects ≥14 days POS. Analysis of individual POCT IgG/IgM-bands did not provide any additional information. POCTs can substitute for CLIAs in cases ≥14 days POS. In low prevalence areas, POCTs would be especially useful when combined with antigen testing in an orthogonal format to increase the PPV of COVID-19 results.

摘要

引言

我们评估了两种严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)抗体即时检验(POCT)(雅培Panbio新冠病毒IgG/IgM检测和罗氏SARS-CoV-2快速抗体检测),并将结果与其各自的化学发光免疫分析(CLIA)(雅培Architect IgM、Architect IgG、罗氏 cobas 总抗体检测)进行比较。

方法

将200份疫情前血清和48份各种病症阳性样本(18份病毒性肝炎、18份登革热、11份抗核抗体和1份双链DNA)用作对照,并评估交叉反应性。招募逆转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)检测SARS-CoV-2呈阳性的匿名剩余血清作为病例(n = 133)。评估了POCT的敏感性/特异性/交叉反应性/阳性预测值(PPV)/阴性预测值(NPV)。分析了POCT与化学发光免疫分析(CLIA)之间的一致性。

结果

在首次RT-PCR检测呈阳性(POS)后≥14天的病例中,雅培/罗氏POCT的特异性分别为98.7%/100%(95%置信区间96.5 - 99.8/98.5 - 100),敏感性分别为97.2%/97.2%(95%置信区间85.5 - 99.9/85.5 - 99.9),PPV分别为68.7%/100%(95%置信区间41.3 - 87.2/94.7 - 100.0),NPV分别为97.4%/97.6%(95%置信区间97.0 - 97.8/97.2 - 98.0)。在首次RT-PCR检测呈阳性后≥14天的病例中,雅培/罗氏POCT与CLIA的一致性分别为97.2%/100%(35/36和36/36结果)。即使在首次RT-PCR检测呈阳性后1月余,两种POCT上单个IgM条带结果的敏感性也未超过95%(雅培为2.78%,罗氏为44.4%)。

结论

两种POCT均具有良好的特异性,与其他抗体的交叉反应性低,在首次RT-PCR检测呈阳性后≥14天的受试者中使用时敏感性>95%。对单个POCT IgG/IgM条带的分析未提供任何额外信息。在首次RT-PCR检测呈阳性后≥14天的病例中,POCT可替代CLIA。在低流行地区,当POCT与抗原检测以正交形式联合使用以提高新冠病毒检测结果的PPV时,将特别有用。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

8
Humoral Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 in Iceland.冰岛人针对 SARS-CoV-2 的体液免疫反应。
N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 29;383(18):1724-1734. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2026116. Epub 2020 Sep 1.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验